“Authority without wisdom is like a heavy axe without an edge, fitter to bruise than polish.”

―

Anne Bradstreet

==============

……… tweet from Republican National Party on June 14, 2018 ………….

Join or Else. If there is one common theme Trump and his merry band of corrupt amoral yahoos have espoused, this is it. Yeah. They may cloak it in some vapid superficial niceties, but, in the end, it “Join or Else.

That said. (stepping back to my words of January 2017)

———————————-

Well.

Yesterday was an interestingly disturbing day to begin “the new era of The United States of America.”

I listened to the Trump inauguration speech with growing horror. It had all the trappings of authoritarianism wrapped snugly in a blanket of patriotism & promises of wealth, security, strength and ‘greatness.’

I listened to it not just as a citizen but as a business guy.

Yeah. Populism can be seen in business just as it can be seen in politics. In business it can be called ‘the cult mentality’ and more often than not its leader is a ‘less-than-benevolent’ dictator. Let’s call it a ‘join, or else’ culture. You can drive membership in this culture a couple of ways … both grounded in fear.

Fear of losing <part 1>.Outsiders are trying to steal what is ours … people who don’t believe in what we believe in are trying to steal what is ours … join us because we are the people who count and matter.

I do not want to lose what is rightfully mine.

Fear of losing <part 2>.I am on the outside looking in and … well … holy shit … if I don’t join I am gonna lose everything <or be branded as a non joiner>.

I will join because if I don’t I am up shit creek without a paddle and lose what I have.

Businesses try this shit all the time. It is their way of building a strong culture, claiming it is inclusive, albeit inclusive is grounded by ‘a tight set of club rules.’ They will argue it is not a tight set but rather a basic construct which binds people in a good way … you call it tomato and I call it rotten. This Trump version of populism is, well, it goes beyond corporate cult culture. This version is close to being batshit crazy dangerous thought leadership.

Let’s look at the brochure and talk a minute with the Trump Club recruiter.

The cover of the brochure suggests an unstoppable America, driven solely by self-interest, in other words, our Club wins at all costs at the expense of anyone who stands in our way! <“if you want to win, join us” it says …>.

It further reads with threatening all those who might stand in the way of this Club and it’s winning/great objective. It contains an adamant stance of ‘no real choice’, i.e., a demanded unity not an asked for unity.

Yeah.

Some of the club benefits look awful good in the brochure … more & better jobs, stronger economy, stronger security, less business regulations and country pride. And then I turn over the brochure just to check out the legalese, the cost of the benefits as it were, to explore how the promises of the Club will be delivered.

The headline on the back of the brochure really wanted me to join this club … the message of “join today because today is the day the people become the rulers of this country.” I vaguely remember that being the call of the French Revolution but it sounds cool <although I could swear we, the people, have been voting in people as representatives for awhile>.

But. Whew. It sounds good. I like it.

It feels empowering and inspirational with the added comfort that I will no longer be one of “the forgotten people which will be forgotten no longer.” I know for sure that would like to not be forgotten and being part of a club would be nice and … well … gosh … uhm … now that I think about it … I didn’t know I had been forgotten.

The recruiter leans forward and says “of course you were, the intellectual globalist elite in Washington and around the world have been keeping you down … they don’t care about you … they have forgotten that it was you that made them part of the wealthy elite.”

Ok. But didn’t your Club President build his wealth off the backs of ‘forgotten people’ and … well … it seems like they aren’t any better off but he is a shitload better off, doesn’t it?

Oh … no, no, no … he appreciates everything they have done for him. Hey. And don’t you want to be wealthy too?

I look down at the brochure and I see the bolded ‘make wealthy’ words and have to ask the club recruiter, decked out in an ‘America first’ hat and neatly pressed ‘make America great’ uniform like shirt, I ask the recruiter … “this becoming wealthy thing … its sounds an awful lot like Amway.”

Oh, no, it is nothing like that at all. Our Club will make everything great for everyone and you will have great opportunities to get the wealth you have always deserved, but haven’t got, because the lazy, less than hard working elite will not get it anymore … we will make sure you get your fair share. Hey. Look at this picture of the Club President in his office … check out the gold curtains … the gold rug and the gold fixtures … that is wealth. That is what you can be part of!

Oh.

And, look, if you join today you get a hat <which you should wear as often as possible so that we can tell who is in the club and who isn’t>.

And, even better, we should have some additional pieces of apparel you can wear soon. In fact … we will have special uniforms & badges for the original club members to showcase their elite status in the club … everyone will want to wear them.

Ok. One last question … your club is “God’s chosen.” I didn’t know God chose … I thought he was all about equal among all men. Does this mean that other clubs don’t believe in God or does God just favor us? And does this mean I have to believe in your version of God and … well … what exactly is your version of God?

“Oh.

Well.

We are a Christian based club … but of course we accept anyone. But don’t forget … Christianity, above all, outlines all the values which lead to a better version of yourself … and, well, that is what we want all Club members to be able to achieve. Everyone should have values, don’t you think?”

Whew. This is fucking crazy shit going on

To be clear. A shitload of the club leaders and followers are going to try and draw some false comparisons and equivalents to past American heroes.

To be clear. This is significantly different than Thomas Jefferson’s plea for unity in his inaugural address in 1800 — “every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle.”

The Trump club has one principle and one opinion.

There is no room for anything else. More important than color of skin, religion, gender … this may actually be my root concern with ‘the club’.

The main principle?

Believe what I believe … or you are not a true believer.

That kind of seems to be the club. Kind of an “us versus them” attitude … uhm … although us <being a US citizen> is actually also them <being US citizens>.

“Oh no … no … why wouldn’t you believe in the United States of America if you lived in there? … everyone believes that. And if they don’t? … well … they should.”

Anyway. Oh. One last question. I didn’t hear it anywhere from the Club President or see it in the brochure … do you guys have a constitution?

Oh, we don’t need one. We just demand a ‘total allegiance to the Club’ … oh … which believes the same things as the country wants … so you should be all for it.”

(ME) Gosh. I am not sure I can join this club … I already have a constitution I live by … and my allegiance is, first & foremost, to that and not some Club and how they think. <period … end of statement>

Look. The one thing Trump was 100% right on is that January 20, 2017 was the dawn of a new era.

“Now comes the hour of action.”

That was the call for the Trump Club. “Join or else”is what should be heard.

Just to be clear.

I am a believer in God <however you want to define it>.

I am a patriot <however you want to define it>.

I am a proud American <however you want to define it>.

But I am not joining the club called “Trump America.”

In fact … I say ‘fuck you and your fucking club.’

As for what I will do? …………….

===============

“I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest.”

“Our souls, which are only now beginning to awaken after the long reign of materialism, harbor seeds of desperation, unbelief, lack of purpose. The whole nightmare of the materialistic attitude, which has turned the life of the universe into a purposeless game, is not yet over. And yet, a weak light glimmers, like a tiny point in an enormous circle of blackness ….”

–

Vassily Kandinsky in 1912

=================

Today I speak of soul, purpose, life and business and in doing so I am totally going to misuse this quote which was written about art. This quote spoke to me in a way that explained the sense of desperation I sometimes hear people speak of when speaking of today’s world.And how they speak about their belief that too many in society think that being materialistic and greed is the prevalent sense of ‘being’ throughout society, business and the world.

I don’t really believe people think that way. Or, maybe better said, is I do not believe people want to think that way. I believe the majority of people simply act in a materialistic mode because they sense there is there no other path available, i.e., if they don’t the other guy will and they will get left behind and not get their ‘fair share’ of whatever the prize appears to be.

Let’s call it materialism survival mode in a zero sum game world.

Therefore the desperation I am talking about is truly a derivative of knowing that there is actually something is better. An understanding that materialism is a path with no real destination, in other words, as soon as you have what you have you want more <sociology calls this “hedonistic adaptation“>.

We want better <most of us> than this. Better just doesn’t seem so attainable these days.

In addition. In this sense of desperation <I wrote “who will stop the madness?” I admit that I don’t hear people using words like ‘weak light glimmering.’ They just see darkness and madness in the world,

Me? I see it. I see the weak light glimmering.

I see it in people themselves <in how I described where I believe the desperation evolves from>.

I see it as a generational “thing” <as in ‘turnings’ described by Strauss & Howe and cyclical attitudes and behaviors over generations, i.e., we have been here before attitudinally>.

I see it, most importantly, as the evolution of capitalism <which is the basic economic model for materialism — although we should all note that ‘materialism ‘ is a human attitude & behavior wrought from within and not from without>.

Anyway. The capitalism evolution is neither good nor bad simply an evolution and what is occurring is the natural friction that occurs during evolution <please note: I do not see this as ‘revolution’>. I could also note that there is natural friction that occurs in any change just that when an entire economic model creates friction it has some larger repercussions.

My belief in this arc of Captalism evolution to grounded in Schumpeter thoughts. If you read Schumpeter it can possibly explain why there is a sense of desperation or maybe a sense of uneasiness and why it is natural to feel this way.

According to Schumpeter there is a natural process of creative destruction within capitalism based on the affect the “cultural contradictions of capitalism” have:

– The Process of Creative Destruction.

I) Capitalism cannot be stationary. It revolutionizes the economic structure “from within”, destroying what went before through a process of competition that affects costs as much as quality. Creativity in consumer goods, methods of transport, of production, systems of organization, search for markets and technology. It is a process that undermines traditional supports existing at a given moment, weakening its own system. Moreover, capitalism devitalizes the idea of “property” <the existence of great and small shareholders>.

*** He is simply saying that capitalism inevitably empowers anyone anywhere to build something … and as that is built something has to be destroyed <or replaced> to accommodate it. Capitalism encourages individual thinking and ideation and business building. Interestingly … it is actually anti-establishment and anti-‘maintaining the norm.’ There is no normal in capitalism beyond its ongoing self destruction and reincarnation.

– II) Rationality. Capitalism encourages rationality in behaviour. Rationality involves, on the one hand, the “maximization” of particular interests of individuals and groups, the use of the instrumental means in a coherent form, and in the same way a series of readaptations empirically controlled by a procedure of flawed -testing. On the other hand, rationalization rushes into both private life and cultural forms. Consumption wins against accumulation, diminishing the desireability of incomes above a certain level. At the same time, however, when the breaks of certain values associated with ethical or religious tradition fail (the sophrosyne), irrational components of behaviour that are critical for capitalism emerge and cannot be refuted with rational arguments, especially when based on long term considerations.

*** Capitalism is a constant struggle between the rational <let’s say ‘profit & dollars & cents’ in this case> and the irrational <let’s call this the human Maslow ‘feel good’ intangible in this case> within people. It is interesting to note he suggests that money is a means to an end. In other words … you could earn a dollar a year and save only a dollar a year and be okay with that if you could consume <buy, eat, live to what you desire> whatever you wanted and needed. Regardless. This constant struggle occurs and when it is perceived to be out of balance there will be friction as compromise is debated <and neither side wants to let go of what they have or what they think – which are often inevitably linked>.

III) The Obsolescence of the Entrepreneurial Function. Increasing difficulties for the classical function of management. Increasing importance of specialized groups. The context, moreover, has been accustomed to change and each time a greater number of factors are calculable. The success of business ends up in removing the owners.

*** He is not suggesting that entrepreneurship or small business becomes obsolete in capitalism. What he is saying is that capitalism inherently makes good small businesses into big businesses and as that happens they lose the ‘entrepreneurial function.’ In other words …. Capitalism encourages small to become big and in doing so they destroy what made them successful in the first place <and inevitably they are ‘destructed’ either from within or from without – by small business that destroys them>.

– IV) Protecting Strata. In the modern era there was a symbiosis between the nobility and the productive sectors. The former occupied the State organization, guided political decisions and supplied officials for the army (the bourgeoisie was only sometimes in charge of local administration). It was a sector that survived the social and technical conditions that produced it. In conclusion: the bourgeoisie is politically defenseless without the protection of non-bourgeoisie sectors, but capitalism, however, encourages the breaking up of the precapitalist framework of society.

*** Capitalism is most effective with a strong middle class and not a massive gap between the haves and have nots. Effective capitalistic societies will strive to reset when the gap is to large and there will be inevitable conflict/friction when this occurs.

– V) Intellectuals. Characterized as those who exercise the power of the spoken and written word, they are used to not having any direct responsibility in practical matters and thus, they lack a direct knowledge of experience. They encourage self-conceived attitudes as “critical”, more from a logic of opposition, we could say, than from a logic of government. There exists a parallel between education and the scale of moral values in the intellectual sectors and the administrative or bureaucratic sectors against the values and technical criteria of the economic system as it operates.

*** I find it interesting that while Schumpeter is NOT discussing governmental structures <democracy, republic, socialism, communism> he gets right to the core of the issue in that inevitably officials who make decisions for the everyday person are most often not the everyday person nor do they think like the everyday person. Therefore the economic system may be operating at odds to what they believe is the right thing to do.

There you go. Schumpeter uses these five arguments to discuss the process of what he calls ‘the self-destruction of capitalism.’ Now. Self-destruction is not suggesting capitalism destructs as in ‘ends’ … but rather that in its ongoing self destruction <or crisis in Hegelian terms> it recreates itself <synthesis> into something new.

Heck. Now that I have written all this I can see why there is so much angst in the world today. I can even see why the business world is talking about “intrapreneurship” <having large companies seek small company attitudes & innovations>, distributed leadership models and, most importantly, Purpose & meaning into work.

Regardless of whether this is evolution or it is a ‘natural conflict’ or not. Conflict is conflict. It is friction. And in this time and place it is friction upon friction.

Not only is the entire system being reshaped <as it is cracked and put back together again> but the generational attitude infrastructure is also in conflict <of which Capitalism has been a catalyst for attitudes & beliefs>.

In the end.

Why are so many of us feeling uneasy, maybe even harboring some thread of desperation in what we see in the world today?

‘Our souls, which are only now beginning to awaken after the long reign of materialism, harbor seeds of desperation, unbelief, lack of purpose …’

Maybe our souls are simply awakening. Gee. That may feel like desperation but, well, who wouldn’t see a glimmer of light in that thinking?

It ministers to some great need, it performs some great service, not for itself, but for others…or failing therein, it ceases to be profitable and ceases to exist.”

–

Calvin Coolidge

==================

“Let’s be honest. There’s not a business anywhere that is without problems. Business is complicated and imperfect. Every business everywhere is staffed with imperfect human beings and exists by providing a product or service to other imperfect human beings.”

–

Bob Parsons

=========================

On Bastille Day it seems appropriate to take a minute and discuss “fraternite” in business.

Today is the French National Day, the 14th of July, or … le 14 juillet. By the way none of my friends in France call it Bastille Day <that is a creation of the American mind>. They celebrate Fête de la Fédération <the National Celebration> or just Le quatorze juillet <the fourteenth of July>. Regardless. The national holiday revolves around the national bleu-blanc-rouge flag and the French values of Liberté, Fraternité and Egalité (“liberty, equality, fraternity/brotherhood” … the national motto of France).

Anyway. Business. Inevitably a great organization exhibits both efficient AND effective progress. What typically creates that combination is part discipline, part structure, part leadership, all glued together by “fraternité”. That ‘glue’ is most often discussed in the American business world as ‘a vision’ or maybe ‘a purpose’. We do so because we Americans hate any kind of lack of specificity. But the truth is that the most common bond of a great organization is a more nebulous concept … one of “fraternité”.

Or.

“Any man aspires to liberty, to equality, but he cannot achieve it without the assistance of other men, without fraternity.”

(Napoleon)

Oddly enough, while this sounds relatively common sense, I kind of feel like business itself needs a revolution to overturn the current thinking to accommodate what should be common sense.

What do I mean? Current business is kind of in a wacky spot. It talks a lot about vision and purpose as if they are “things” … like maybe a lighthouse anyone can see as they bob around the chaotic sea of business life to find a way home. By the way … I would argue that is a very individualistic thought — “I can find my way home” type thought – and not really a team thought <but that could quite easily be debated>.

Regardless. Fraternity is more like “everyone not only knowing what they need to do to keep the ship afloat but actually pitching in whether needed or not because they love the ship itself.” That may sound like some wacky nuance but I have to warn people that revolutions can kind of gain some momentum off of some fairly wacky things on occasion. By the way, this thought is a more nebulous “I feel this way” aspect of organizational culture and, as noted many times, if it cannot be measured or indexed or scored <note: most older leaders into today’s business just don’t like that kind of shit>.

Anyway. Not to beat this metaphor to death but I do believe we need a semi-revolution in the way business organizations are created and run and managed. I think we may need that revolution because “fraternité” as a core principle just ain’t the way business is run. And, yes, it should be viewed as a “core” principle because … uhm … when discipline falls apart, when structure falls apart, when leadership falls apart … what keeps you on the battlefield and fighting is … yeah … “fraternité.” Yeah, yeah, yeah. A lot of people talk about a “community” or “company team” or some other nice sounding platitude which sounds a lot like “fraternité” but its mostly lip service.

On a bigger organizational level I worry about how an idea like this is getting suffocated by generational issues <younger people desire something and older people think they know the best> and maybe an outcome-is-the-only-thing-that-matters versus a belief business should incorporate altruistic aspects. Both of those conflicts are HUGE issues. I have written about in 1200+ word thought pieces on both of these but, on the former, the best piece I can share is from Corporate Rebels “Cut The Crap: The Made-Up Nonsense About Generations At Work” which states all people want meaning at work (regardless of age or generational label).

I actually believe we need some revolutionary thinking on the latter. To me we have a bunch of people who look at business and turn away because … well … I fear that they only believe they can change the world through more altruistic pursuits and not traditional business. And, yes, they are important and good pursuits but, from a larger perspective, business drives the world. Business makes shit that makes lives easier and healthier and impacts the home and life in ways that it is difficult to imagine let alone outline in a few words <and the business office/working groups creates behavioral cues which ripple out into culture>.

Somehow … someway … we need to insert the ‘believers of principles’ into the business world with all of their ambition and hope and remind them – and empower them – that they can change the world.

That they can make the world a better place. They can make society and people and lives better. And they can do it in business … not just altruistic career opportunities. If we do that, and do that well, I tend to believe we will build more organizations driven at its core by a sense of “fraternité” rather than a bunch of documents setting out some guiding principles, vision and purpose which everyone says “okay … let’s do that.”

It is quite possible that I am talking about ‘the soul’ of an organization. What I do know is that … well … read the following quote:

====================

“I have found no greater satisfaction than achieving success through honest dealing and strict adherence to the view that, for you to gain, those you deal with should gain as well.”

Alan Greenspan

===============================

I do believe we need to be drawing some lines in business. And I don’t mean company handbook type lines or even some well-crafted ‘lines’ in “how we conduct our business” or “who we are” but maybe they are more lines with regard to some unwritten principles.

I say that because when you can gather a group of people together who share a strong set of principles … well … they will walk straight into a hail of bullets to not only survive but to get good shit done.

==========

“Morality, like art, means drawing a line someplace.

Oscar Wilde

===========

Now. Business absolutely makes dealing with your principles a constant struggle. It can kind of suffocate your principles in between the pragmatic aspects of getting shit done <discipline & structure> and the faux burden of some vision or grander purpose which “you know is important to us therefore it should be important to you.” Frankly, when suffocated by these bookends you don’t have a lot of elbow room for any type of true, intangible, unsolicited camaraderie.

The fraternité is more forced than natural. Obviously, when it is not natural it is not as strong.

In the end.

Fraternité in business. I believe we have forgotten this. And while I do believe many of us have forgotten how to draw lines with regard to our principles I tend to believe business, in general, has simply decided to just draw lines <in a box in fact> and say “there you go” … there are your principles and rules for comraderie.

That is kind of whack.

Look. I can honestly tell you that being a senior leader in a business and organization you like <you do not have to love> may be one of the greatest experiences anyone can ever have. What makes that experience truly great is when you are fortunate enough to foster something intangible, something that really cannot be measured, and something which doesn’t earn you some performance bonus at the end of the year … it is when you stumble upon the sense of fraternité.

I am sure some organizational guru will send me a link to “steps to build a fraternité organization” and … well … good for them. I tend to believe this is one of those soul aspects, intangible things, that is created less by some “how to” guide or some formula and more by simple good intentions combined with some good discipline, construct and leadership. To steal another word from the motto, by creating a fraternité organization you inevitably create Liberté for the organization to be te best version of what it can be.

This is what I thought about today, July 14th, as I thought about the national motto of France “liberty, equality, fraternity <brotherhood>”. With that I imagine I should end with where I began … no enterprise can exist for itself alone. That is the foundation for a fraternité organization.

I almost called this “day <fill in the blank>of the shitshow” but I didn’t.

Look.

I am no genius but at the Trump 100 day mark I suggested the second 100 days would look a lot like the first 100 days <inconsistent, ineffective & incompetent> for several very sound, rational reasons. And as we close in on 200 days … well … I look like a genius. And … just to share my conclusion if you want to stop reading now … I envision the next 100 days just as hollow as the last 200 days for almost exactly the same reasons.

Until the main reason is solved <quality people in necessary staff positions> the lean, mean and obscenely incompetent current white house staff will remain incredibly competent at … well … doing nothing truly meaningful <but maintaining an appearance of disruptive thinkers>.

I will ignore the tweets … entertaining but absurd.

I will ignore the unnecessary hyperbole … entertaining and absurd.

I will ignore the rambling nonsensical monologues … not as entertaining and even more absurd.

I will ignore the bizarre foreign policy steps … entertaining to watch but absurdly dangerous in reality.

However … I will pay attention to leadership and results.

I have to assume despite the fact the President claims a finely tuned white house which has done more than any other resident since maybe FDR … this whole adventure has not been exactly how he planned it to go.

For someone who likes winning I am not so sure this kind of ‘winning’ is what he had in mind.

For someone who claims to be ‘the best negotiator’ <or at least better than anyone in government prior to him> I am not so sure this kind of ‘negotiating results’ or even public glimpses into his negotiating skills is what he had in mind.

For someone who claimed “I alone can fix it” I am not so sure this is the kind of ‘fixing’ he had in mind.

==============

“Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully or write poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That’s how I get my kicks.”

—

Donald Trump

==================

What has the administration done?

Well, yes, in the first 6 months some things truly have been done.

First, I will ignore the stock market. As every president prior to this absurd one recognized … the market has a mind of its own and, in general, ignores presidents <so attaching yourself to it and ts results is like pegging my success to some squirrel in my backyard>. But even with its general disregard for a President what the stock market has really learned is that Trump will not do as much as some had hoped for … and others feared. In the stock market’s mind this is called ‘clarity’ or certainty … and markets thrive when uncertainty diminishes <because then it is all about trends and not surprises>. Trump will not like to hear it but the central banks control the fate of stock markets more than he will ever want <so he should actually be cuddling up to central bank more>.

Second, I will ignore the Supreme Court Justice nomination because this was a “gimmee putt” for any Republican who stumbled their way into the oval office.

Just as I wouldn’t have credited Hillary this “win” was owned by whatever party won the white house not the individual in the white house.

Anyway.

The first 200 days.

Yes. Things done. I would call it “tinkering under the hood” stuff. Some executive orders, some cutting back on regulations, maybe taking some, what they would consider, unnecessary pieces out so the engine can run a little more effectively.

Most things have been ‘destruction’ type actions and not construction type actions.

And none of them are the bigger things which make radical shifts with regard to the country’s well-being.

Here is the problem with the Trump administration just tinkering under the hood. During the campaign and continuing into the first 200 days the administration, and Trump in particular, have claimed I have a Hyundai and I deserve a Ferrari.

Therefore, to date, they are just giving me a better running Hyundai and they still haven’t shown me <a> what my Ferrari is going to look like or <b> when I may expect to see my Ferrari in my driveway or even <c> what they are going to do to actually make it possible to have a Ferrari.

That alone makes for a fairly hollow first 200 days.

But why haven’t we received even those basic, what I would call, “map of things you should expect” stuff?

To date this administration has been defined by … well … a fog of dysfunction driven by a clammy inconsistent breeze called Donald J Trump which leaves us all feeling a little uneasy that something bad awaits us in the fucking clammy fog.

Look.

While I buy he is transactional … he is an inconsistent transactional person. He shows no sign of cohesive thinking, shows poor instincts and a complete lack of impulse control <which derails any necessary momentum every sane business leader knows you need to have to sustain any larger idea> and an extraordinarily immature naïve view of how the world really works <business, government and global> all buried in a pea like brain that does not envision what the end game looks like.

I score the last 200 days as relatively hollow and, once again, I see no signs of changes needed to get us out of hollow in and into substance.

I personally do not see him changing <becoming more engaged, take on more responsibility and try and lead rather than criticize> therefore the administration will live and die by the people who will end up in the administration <assuming they ever do join up>. Trump really has no policy – which is needed to lead without actually having to hold everyone’s hand — therefore he needs to <a> hire people who understand policy and can sell policy and <b> accumulate a group of policy makers who are aligned <not by loyalty but rather by ideology> so that the end puzzle gets built so it looks like a frickin’ puzzle and not just a bunch of random policies which look good in isolation but crappy when viewed together.

There needs to be a team, not a loyal team, but a qualified team for any chance to get out of this hollow hole we seem to get deeper and deeper into.

Yeah yeah yeah. Trumpeteers will come out of the woodwork and suggest “this is not Trump’s fault.”

They would be wrong.

I have been in so many companies that have told me to hire only to have my candidates get mired in the HR administrative mud for so long you are fairly sure they were just humoring you into believing you could actually hire someone that I can certainly feel the pain of hiring and open positions.

But this is not the case.

The congress has been slower in confirming Trump candidates but it is not because of democrats or congress inefficiency it is because Trump nominees are slow to complete paperwork or have to deal with conflict issues <they are often non-traditional appointees>. In addition the president has been even slower to send nominations to Congress.

The Trump administration is not eliminating the positions, Trump is just deciding not filling them <I assume he is not convinced they would actually provide value>.

Sure … there is a legitimate truth that government should be streamlined <positions eliminated> but not nominating needed people to implement your transactional ideology simply means … well … none of your frickin’ transactions get completed <and a business person of any competence whose career has been built off of transactions, and not vision, would know this>.

Anyway.

A couple things that become concerning beyond the staffing challenge as we move on to day 201 and beyond:

They market problems not solutions

I was foolish enough to subscribe to the White House Daily email. I will admit.

If I read it every day I would most likely slit my wrists. Every single email highlights a problem … disaster, failing, crime, horrible trade deals, being taken advantage of, the list goes on and on and on.

Shit.

In one email they actually suggested one of their own departments, The Congressional Budget Office, yeah … one of their OWN DEPARTMENTS … did not know how to do their job <… dude … they report to you …>.

They peddle problems and diminish people.

So far over 200 days they have invested 198 days <I made that number up> pounding us that we are living in a shithole created by shit-for-brains people … and, yet, they have offered us solutions worth a shit.

That’s not what leaders do … even transactional leaders. Even transactional leaders stand up and show us a list of the transactions we are aiming to get done. Some leaders <most in fact> would think of this as “how you should judge me” information.

This criticism is not about the 330 million citizens of the country <albeit we would benefit from knowing his> this is more about getting shit done in the next 100, 200 and 300 days. The people who have to do the work, do the policy, will be significantly more effective if you hand out a project list of shit I want to get done. if you have smart qualified people they will be like ants on sugar <all over it>.

I am not suggesting we need an administration that is in the “unicorns & rainbow” business but I do know the country would benefit if the administration would peddle solutions rather than problems but the administration itself would also benefit because … well … that is how good organizations actually get their employees to do good shit. It would be nice if they stopped thinking in terms of being in the destruction business and thought more about being in the construction business with regard to ideas & policies.

Without it … expect more empty ‘doom & gloom’ marketing of problems in the 100 days ahead.

Which leads me to …

Lack of vision

I hire managers to manage tactics … I hire leaders to share a vision. A transactional leader is a tactical leader.

And you can get away with that for a while but at some point the tactics need to fill some vision bucket <or they are simply scattered drops of water destined to dry up in the heat of time>.

Look.

I imagine the number one gripe against Obama was that he was too visionary and not tactical enough <in public>. But no one ever doubted his vision for America and Americans. People may have griped about some of the tactics but we always knew the ‘why’ of the tactical and transaction decisions. We bitched about ‘bad deals’ but understood why the deal was being pursued.

Without vision clarity 300 million plus people sit in their homes and go to work absent of really knowing “why.” Uhm. In the absence of why understanding everything begins to look random and people, in general, do not embrace random as a way of Life.

They need to address those 2 thing. Fast.

Those two things are going to haunt this presidency for 100’s of days unless they are addressed.

Those two things are basic Leadership 101 things.

I say that because while I am as detailed as possible with regard to how to fix the hollow presidency’s arc of behavior I remain concerned that the president, a self proclaimed successful business person, shows little signs he understands basic leadership behavior <and attitudes>. I admit … while I sensed his early on I never expected him to be this inept at basic leadership skills.

Being the president is not the same as the hollow branding crap Trump has built his riches off of. Shit. A real business leader demands more knowledge than that. Leadership requires discipline, hard work, focus, at least a basic understanding of the details they want their organization to move forward with and, as Trump himself said, a willingness to get everybody in a room and hammer out a deal.

That’s leadership.

Through the first 200 days of Trump’s presidency … uhm … he has exhibited none.

That is all on him.

After 200 days the president has managed to showcase a stunning total lack of ability to lead. And I use ‘stunning’ because he actually has a Congress completely under Republican control.

This stunning lack of leadership actually has repercussions beyond how people like I will measure 100 days to come. While we will offer ‘what was done’ report cards ad nausea the ultimate measurement , and battle, will be over character – not tangible wins & losses..

I am fairly sure in the bible <Corinthians ?> it says something like: Do not be misled: “Bad company corrupts good character.”

I state that because over the first 200 days there has been a stunning lack of truth coming from this White House which appears to be a blatant attempt to corrupt the character of good men & women.

I have a thought piece coming up on how the Trump administration is building an alternative universe in a way that I am fairly sure not many of us in a free world have ever seen before <but I am familiar with it having read dozens of books on communist Soviet Union>.

They have subverted Fake News from meaning actually unsourced, completely made-up things like the Enquirer to news they simply do not like.

Transparency means sharing information only when asked and not done in a forthcoming way.

They have attempted to make honesty irrelevant by investing gobs of energy undermining anything & everything everyone else says <if no one is honest than honesty is in the eyes of the beholder>.

They have continued to construct such a stark alternative universe to what actually exists by using scraps of truth, using a language of their own making & using cult-like recruitment tactics so that normal everyday schmucks like you & I are offered such a stark contrast it becomes difficult to bridge between what they say and what we see.

In the end.

I will restate exactly what I said at the end of the 1st 100 days … suffice it to say that I see some fairly concerning hollowness. What I mean by that is after 100 days one could highlight a variety of empty spots which … well … will dog the administration from day 101 forward.

And while I would like to point out some specifics I think we would all like to let me conclude with the “issue to be resolved in order to eliminate future hollowness.”

I am not sure at 71 if Trump can actually attain what he really needs to be successful over the ensuing 100 day increments as a president – enlightenment.

The mind once enlightened cannot again become dark.

–

Thomas Paine, A Letter Addressed to the Abbe Raynal on the Affairs of North America

Beyond all the bizarre tweets, inappropriate speeches and overall adolescent behavior … he is a painful amateur leader. Painful in that even I, who has led but not to this level, cringe almost every day at the amateur mistakes he makes as a leader.

This amateurishness is a disease stalking the hallways of the White House. I say that because while it is clear to everyone but trump why ‘no one listens to him or shows loyalty to him’ it is not clear why some very talented knowledgeable leaders surrounding him aren’t building at least a semblance of a construct from which leadership could grow.

Trump must be a powerful disease to have infected true talent that much.

There are a bunch of things that could turn this bizarre ship around but one, and only one, thing truly matters – will President Trump ever permit his mind to be enlightened. For that is the path out of the darkness that his administration tries to convince us we all live in as well as some of the darker more ignorant & naïve aspects of the current administration’s behavior.

Lastly.

I don’t care if you voted for Trump or not … you have to admit this whole situation is bizarre and he is a seemingly bizarre human being.

You may not agree with me that he is a fool but I cannot find one person who doesn’t think this whole presidency so far is just fucking bizarre.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed. It is the only thing that ever has.”

—–

Margaret Mead

================

So.

I was listening to a bunch of talking heads on tv speculating on a staff shake up in the Trump white house personnel.

One thing I heard caught my attention … “well, part of the president’s issue is that he has kind of a hodgepodge of personnel.”

And that thought is correct. And it made me think a little bit.

The truth is once you move past managing a group or running a mom & pop sized business every management team you manage will be a hodgepodge of people, skills, personalities and … well … loyalty. Not only is it impossible to hire in ‘your people’ in every slot … most good leaders do not want to do that.

All that said.

To be clear.

Trump is possibly one of the crappiest senior leaders I have ever seen and he appears to have no belief that words matter and has no understanding of the concept of ‘communication alignment’ <let alone any alignment> … however … he is what he is. And because he is what he is … inconsistencies included … the staff he surrounds himself matters a shitload with regard to overall effectiveness.

What do I mean?

Trump forces his staff to adjust in real time as he communicates, and thinks, in real time.

Trump has never worked in a large organization nor has he ever truly had to manage a larger group of people, let alone senior executives.

He has always been the spokesperson and the brand and the final word … surrounded by family who was more than happy to simply double and triple down on whatever dad said <and be loyal to even his craziest tactical maneuvering and craziest words and wordsmithing>.

Real senior executives do not work that way nor is it a particularly effective method outside of a mom & pop structure.

In a real business organization you don’t get to pick & choose everyone in your circle … most times it is a hodgepodge of skills, personalities and experience. And you know what? You learn to manage them effectively because that is what a leader does.

You adapt some of you to accommodate some of them<yeah … sure … envision Trump doing that … uhm … sure … ain’t gonna happen>.

Trump is being forced out of his mom & pop management model into a more traditional larger business management model <and he is going kicking & screaming>.

Most people learn this as soon as they move from group management to department management <you cannot fire everyone and rehire only your people> and absolutely learn this lesson as soon as you move into the C-level positions.

Another aspect is when you get a position you do not treat it as an “I won so you need to …” but rather “I now get to lead and I am going to have to …”

All that said.

You learn some management personnel tricks to help you out.

I always tried to bring one person with me wherever I went as I moved up. Depending on the structure of the organization I always wanted at least one person who could “translate” me to the hodgepodge team. This wasn’t necessarily done to dictate my desires & behaviors onto a team but rather to help them align to how I managed so they could adapt and move faster.

I manage nothing like Trump but let’s assume Trump is moving into the presidency … it almost becomes mandatory for effectiveness that he has a team aligned on “what to do when Trump does his crazy.” He need a management team that doesn’t argue about what to do he needs a management team that absorbs the blow and moves out doing what needs to be done as the true power brokers for getting shit done.

By the way … this is not about loyalty to Trump this is about loyalty to most effectively getting good shit done. I didn’t care if people bitched about me behind my back <I always assumed they did> what I cared about is that they respected the general idea and invested their energy in trying to figure out how to best effectively implement the idea rather than invest energy trying to defend anything they really would have preferred just bitching about behind my back.

I always preferred loyalty to “getting good smart shit done”and always believed I would ultimately earn some respect if I <Me> always remained loyal to the idea of “enabling good smart shit to get done.”

Before I finish this thought I will admit my preference was always to try an bring in two foundational team members in order to kind of create some pillars … but you can get away with one to align a hodgepodge of managers & executives.

Anyway.

In an organization the size of a presidency Trump needs a translator but more importantly he needs an aligned team with regard to what to do with him and his behavior <and not be arguing over it>.

……… a Trump management team ………

Trump’s inclination will be with what he feels most comfortable with — family.

His next inclination will be with what makes him feel the best — the ones who unflinchingly try and power-broke the crazy <he would call them unflinching loyalists>.

Neither of those have anything to do with effective leadership nor do they have anything to do with effective ‘management of getting shit done.’

He has never been in a large organization nor has he managed a large group of people nor has he tried to get a large group of people aligned to agree & do some shit.

He naturally gravitates toward employees who don’t deliver bad news and those who deliver flattery.

They may feel good to have around but they are the absolute worst people to have on your management team. You only build a team like that if you have no interest in improving, no interest in any intellectual conflict <which is what actually sparks better ideas> and/or you are so insecure or arrogant <yes, you can be both> you don’t want any ideas other than your own.

Most often it is the senior leadership who challenges you that prompt new insights and help propel the group to success.

“You need people who have different points of view and aren’t afraid to argue. They are the kind of people who stop the organization from doing stupid things.”

Harvard Business Review

Look.

All leaders assume responsibility for a hodgepodge of senior managers. That’s what we do.

And we learn to set what expectations are and align on vision and encourage some flexibility & adapting and get going.

And we learn that some of what we do and what we think works a little better in one place than anther and that some people are better than we think at first blush and some people we really liked when we met them are worse than we thought.

And we learn that you don’t demand respect but rather earn it and loyalty is gained through respect.

I would imagine that engendering loyalty to Trump is hard in that up to this point loyalty most likely centered on fame & fortune. And most of us who have led in larger organizations understand that strong foundational loyalty is less about the tangible fame & fortune but rather respect. He is gonna have some problems with that.

I would imagine that effectiveness to Trump is blind support for him and what he says. And most of us who have led in larger organizations understand that effectiveness is less about support for what the leader says … but rather in structured response to a leader’s guidance & thoughts. I never wanted people to do what I said … I wanted people to do what needed to be done. He is gonna have some problems with that.

I would imagine that alignment to Trump is familial. And most of us who have led in a larger organization want the exact same thing … but we know we have a hodgepodge team who is ‘the family’ and we deal with it.

Would I shake up the Trump administration? Yeah. I surely would.

And I would do it almost exactly opposite of how I envision he is likely to do it.

He doesn’t understand there is a campaign team and now he needs an effective doing team. He bludgeoned us with his dull insights on the campaign trail and now he needs to focus more on action.

What would I do with his cadre of white men?

I, personally, would make Kushner my chief of staff. He has no fucking clue how to do the job but he knows the Trumpster better than anyone in the world.

Give him some deputies who have a shitload of government experience. Send Ivanka off to write a real book. And build a staff of Republican zealots who know how to get shit done. Trust the Kushner kid to translate what the Donald J crazy means to everyone.

Bannon can stay but he just needs to focus on feeding the Trump crazy and let Kushner kid deal with the crazy output.

Others <just off the top of my head>. I love Wilbur Ross. Mnuchin almost seems overwhelmed-giddy by being in the spotlight. I would find a sane version of Mulvaney to take his job. I would tell Tillerson to start hiring like a mad man and tell him he can fire whoever he doesn’t need once he actually has some staff to do some shit. Just get out of Mattis, McMaster and Kelly’s way. I can’t get rid of Sessions even though I think he is crazy <I think he thinks he lives in the 1950’s> but because he actually translates Trump crazy better than anyone other than maybe that little pit bull Lewandowski. I would wake up Carson, Perry, and all the other Cabinet members we haven’t heard a peep out of and ask them if they would like to participate in this circus.

I imagine my real point is that to be an effective leader of a hodgepodge group it is more important that THEY can work together than YOU like them.

Because if they can work together well than there is a better chance that the organization will not do stupid shit even if you make a stupid decision, your crazy will come to life as not-so-crazy pragmatism and knee-jerk spontaneous crazy asshat tweets simply get absorbed into seamless actions which make the tweets look a little less spontaneous, a little less knee jerk, a little less crazy … but still asshat because that is who you are.

And that is the value of a non-arguing hodgepodge group. They tend to mute the mistakes and crazy and amplify the actual good ideas and thoughts you may actually have.

If I were a management consultant for Trump <I would shoot myself> I would look at him as a lost cause … he is what he is. He is a flower <with thorns> and I would turn my attention to the environment the flower is growing in.

If I were a management consultant for Trump <I would shoot myself> I would find a team that maybe wasn’t on the “Trump train” but rather find competent people who can do shit that I want done <and let the chief of staff … who is on the Trump Train … get them doing Trump train shit>.

If I were a management consultant for Trump <I would shoot myself> I would turn to the Kushner kid and say “you wanted in … you are in. You are the Trump whisperer. Make shit happen.”

Let me be clear.

Trump will shake up his staff and maybe cabinet members and he will fuck it up. He has no idea how to manage a business organization other than in a mom & pop style and he has no innate leadership skills and his management instincts suck.

And he has no clue how to build an effective team <someone should tell him there is not enough room up his ass for all the people he actually needs to run a country let alone a viably larger sized organization>.

Oh. And he is a narcissistic asshat who believes no one knows better than he does.

In the end.

As I stated in my Trump 100 day piece … he did nothing in his first 100 days that would suggest the next 100 days <and foreseeable 100 day increments> would be any smoother, efficient or effective. I am 99% confident he will shake up his staff and management team and I cannot envision it proceeding smoothly, efficiently or effectively. Why? Because he has no clue what he is doing.

“Maybe we feel empty because we leave pieces of ourselves in everything we used to love.”

―

R. M. Drake

========================

“… ’Tis not for the victory, though, that we shall weep: there is nothing altered in that but the soul looks upon things with another eye and represents them to itself with another kind of face; for everything has many faces and several aspects.”

—

Michel de Montaigne

==========================

Ok.

The Trump administration’s 1st 100 days.

On the 94th day <today> of the Trump administration I am going to share my semi-unenlightened point of view on the first 100 days … mostly because I cannot envision any significant changes on the items I am judging the administration on in the next 6 days <and it seems like everyone else wants to judge them on other things>.

Regardless.

Suffice it to say that I see some fairly concerning hollowness. What I mean by that is after 100 days one could highlight a variety of empty spots which … well … will dog the administration from day 101 forward.

Now.

Before someone wants to suggest 100 days isn’t fair to judge or “how can you fairly assess someone and something in 100 days” I will state two things:

Read my assessment below. I will judge based off of my own business experience and, yes, I have endured absorbing a $100 million plus piece of business into an organization, have been part of several significant sized company mergers <think two top 12 national banks merging> as well as a onboarding a variety of difference sized and complex businesses and seen what it takes from operations, skills ramp up, process, accounting and the basic transferal of knowledge and project lists to insure nothing gets dropped.

Any time anyone ever pushes back on “100 days is not realistic” I refer to Napoleon.

A shitload can happen in 100 days if you know what you are doing, are a good leader and have a great support <management> team.

In fact you can gather almost 100,000 personnel and the materials needed to sustain them and move them hundreds of miles and get them to perform at the highest level if you really have your shit together.

100 days is a lifetime if you use it well.

Businesses can dither around and make excuses but if you cannot get something done in 100 days you should probably be looking for some other business to conduct.

If someone <Napoleon> can swing almost 100,000 men into action and in a span of three or four days of battle at the end of 100 days almost win a victory when outnumbered and out resourced it seems pretty logical that we in business can certainly make a widget in 100 days.

Of course … Trump would call Napoleon a loser.

Anyway.

That said. Trump administration and 100 days.

Now.

On a daily basis we get bludgeoned with so much shit from the Trump administration it is difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. Suffice it to say there are so many things wrong it is a waste of time to point out any of the good. Most of the wrong things are larger structural issues which are … well … concerning.

So while Donald J Trump invests his energy trying to point out ‘things’ or, if I wanted to be generous, tactical activity, and signing a lot of documents … we should be more concerned about the structural activity, & inactivity, which just took place in the first 100 days.

As usual … I will not provide my judgement based on politics but rather through the lens of a business guy. Having endured a number of “first 100 days” I know what it takes and I know how if you get the 1st 100 days wrong it dogs you for … well … it dogs you. Suffice it to say you only make the “wow, I royally screwed up the first 100 days” once as a manager/leader.

You either get fired or you have learned the lesson so painfully you never permit it to happen again.

That said.

Here you go.

Hiring

In my Napoleon post I make a point about his most famous loss … from a business perspective the key to the Waterloo loss <to me> was simple. Napoleon didn’t have his tried & true chief of staff, Marshal Berthier, on this campaign.

Napoleon sorely missed the legendary Marshal Berthier as chief of staff, and Marshal Soult <his replacement> was a good, but not as good, substitute.

Oh.

And there was a domino effect on the entire management team as people shifted to assume slightly new roles.

Napoleon came within a whisker of winning at Waterloo … after only 100 days. One could argue that with his chief of staff the right little things would have happened and the wrong little things would have been minimized — and he would have won after 100 days.

Regardless.

One of the things you unequivocally know as a business leader is the best plans in the world aren’t worth a shit if you do not have the people to implement them. Yeah. Nothing kills a plan faster than no people to implement.

Trump has doubly failed on hiring … and this will dog him way beyond the 100 days it has already dogged him.

Doubly?

He first failed by not having the key people in place <as much as he could> on day one … to start running on day one. If you have a 100 day plan, and you actually plan on doing the plan in 100 days, you have to burst out of the starting gate … not amble … or stumble.

I would have identified the key people <not just Cabinet members but also midlevel & on-the-ground people> and had everyone all lined up to go. It’s your only chance to get a 100 day plan done.

That did not happen. Not even close. That is an F <and, to complete this point, Mattis and Kelly were excellent ‘hires’ … but Mattis still has something like 150 open posts under him>.

He secondly failed by not having the key people in place by the end of 100 days. This is not about cabinet members … this is about the people who keep the ship/shit running and who get the shit done. It is possible you can be forgiven for not being ready at the starting gate but if you are not … it is unforgivable to not have your main priority within your first 100 days to have a plan to have everyone in place by day 101.

That is business malpractice if not done.

He doesn’t need to hire all the open positions because I am fine with eliminating some unnecessary jobs … but … every sane business person in the world errs on the side of loading up on personnel upfront not only to insure all the shit gets done but not everyone is going to work out so the organization naturally thins out anyway.

This is an F. I would give lower if there was anything lower. This is going to dog him for … well … too long for the country’ sake.

Competence

“Ten times Trump asked her (Merkel) if he could negotiate a trade deal with Germany,” the newspaper quoted a senior German politician as saying.

“Every time she replied, ‘You can’t do a trade deal with Germany, only the EU’,” the politician said. “On the eleventh refusal, Trump finally got the message, ‘Oh, we’ll do a deal with Europe then.'”

Ok.

I would guess over 50% of everyday Americans would not know, because of the EU, that USA doesn’t negotiate one-on-one trade deals with European countries.

I would also guess over 95% of everyday Americans would have no clue whether Korea has ever been part of China.

I would also guess that over 75% of everyday Americans wouldn’t know that Korea is actually a peninsula and not an island.

I would actually guess that over 90% of Americans already knew that healthcare was really complicated.

But I would guess that 99.9% of Americans would like their president to know all this shit.

As a business person all of this ignorance is unacceptable. It is unacceptable because it is exactly like walking into a huge sales meeting without doing your homework.

And as for “learning & adapting”?

Sure. I give business people credit for that all the time … but not if it is something 99% of your peers already had learned and it was common knowledge.

You don’t get credit for simply catching up to what all of us already knew.

For god’s sake … I know all this shit and I am not even close to being qualified to being the President.

The majority of the time he is skating on the incredibly thin ice of the slippery surface of irrelevance. I am not sure how anyone could grade him higher than an F if I can point out that 90% of the entire country knew something he didn’t know … that this is all complicated.

So far his competence has skated on irrelevance & simple-minded. The Olympic skating judges would give him a 1.

The business judges would give him an F.

Corruption

This is the sword of Damocles. Or maybe it is the Pit and the Pendulum.

I do not begrudge a business person hesitating to cut themselves off from what has most likely been their lifeblood & soul since they can remember starting to breathe … but this is crazy.

The Trump family and half of his Cabinet, let alone close friends, will most likely benefit from how he thinks & what he thinks should be done. It will reek of corruption as we try and disentangle what is truly just a good idea and what is an idea driven by what will benefit them <and even then someone will have to disentangle whether that is simply the outcome of what is best for everyone or simply a skewed-billionaire-warped-view of what is good for everyday schmucks like me>.

I am not smart enough to figure out how to create enough distance so we can assess ideas fairly, and corruption issues fairly, but what I do know is that I am smart enough to have resolved it within the first 100 days. Not just for the image of things but because it will dog every recommendation, every tactic, every decision and everything discussed from day 101 until … well … whenever.

This is like carrying a backpack filled with 100 pounds of rocks while you try and run a 100 yard dash. And then saying at yard 101 … “what the hell, let’s keep the back pack on, and full of rocks, and lets run the rest of the race.”

I give an F for not even dealing with it and an ‘incomplete’ on actual corruption because we need to see real policy to judge who benefits and who doesn’t.

Discourse

It has almost become this alternative universe in which because my new boss has no filter and scatters random facts, lies and hyperbole like an autumn wind blows leaves in your gutters clogging them all up and rotting the house unseen.

In this alternative universe everyone who works for my new boss, even smart people and savvy politicians, can start saying stupid things under the guise of ‘being unfiltered truth tellers.’ Trump’s blunt high school discourse style is bleeding into the entire administration discourse.

In other words … the discourse has lowered to a place a snake could jump over it.

What do I mean?

When someone like Jeff Sessions, a seemingly heinous man but a savvy politician, barrels into a conversation referring to Hawaii <an actual state in the United States>, disdainfully, as “an island in the middle of the Pacific” that feels like a ripple affect empowerment of the boss standards/style than it does of someone who really knows better <that they are a role model>.

And then there is Spicey <Sean Spicer> who seems semi-qualified, experienced and not stupid and, yet, day after day he stands up in a press briefing room spewing … well … stupidity.

Okay. That was harsh

Let me say it better.

Donald J Trump is encouraging everyone in his administration to be a little bit lazier with how thoughtful they are in how they say things. I am sure they would argue I am tainted by the heinous ‘political correctness’ disease but I would suggest back to them that words matter, words can create some unintended beliefs on intentions <speaker’s and administration> and words can actually encourage some distinct behavior & attitudes.

If they were in a bar, I wouldn’t care. They are the leaders of 330 million people.

I would encourage them to embrace the good aspects of political correctness and embrace a civil discourse, respect & dignity for all 50 states/330 million people/all the countries around the world, and stop being lazy with thinking about what they say.

Oh.

The only place we have seen solid discourse is the military cabinet members. Stellar communication. Mostly unseen by majority of Americans Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis and Army Gen. Joseph Votel, the chief of Central Command, gave a press conference … in the midst of confusing communication from everyone else in the administration, the president included, was refreshingly clear & candid.

Sigh <again>.

On discourse … I can’t even grade the administration because I want to drop them back several grades to elementary school and have some English teacher remind them of proper use of adjectives, adverbs and general punctuation.

I dream about the day Trump can put together a coherent paragraph.

Society cannot take another couple hundred days of this style of discourse let alone the first 100 days we have endured.

We are becoming worse as people through the type of communication & discourse taking place by this administration. That deserves an F.

Coordination, collusion or clueless.

This Russia thing. Whew. This thing just will not go away.

At minimum it just looks like coordination <not collusion>.

What do I mean?

Someone, maybe someones, in the Trump campaign had access to some good juicy information and they handed it over to Trump, who would never in a million years think or ask whether he should use it <because (a) he does not care if something is true or not if it sounds good, and (b) all he cares about is making news and winning> and he used it.

Or someone whispered in Trump’s ear some juicy conspiracy theory and he jumped at the chance to sling it out there and that someone <or someones> mentioned to the juicy information providers Trump was jumping on something and they set their trolls out to make it seem like it was real & viable.

The difficulty is there may be nothing there … but they seem like they are hiding something by constantly denying … well … everything … only to be proven wrong and it certainly seems too coincidental in a variety of ways to be random.

Look.

The president’s issue is one of two things … he was either complicit or he was naïve. I cannot envision either of those two things being publicly spewed forth in the media, by the media, will be palatable to the narcissistic ‘I have a big brain’ Donald J Trump.

But … you know how to make the Russia thing go away? Someone should tell the president to stop tweeting crap and stand up and say “here is who met Russian people during the campaign, what they said, and from here on out no matter how much you dig there is no more.”

Just a side note to the silly people who say “no Russian made someone vote some way.” You really can’t believe that. Not if you have ever had a career in advertising & marketing. Effective communications can inspire people to think & do things. Effective propaganda can inspire people to think stupid things and do stupid things.

All that said.

Hanging over the administration neck is either coordination, collusion or cluelessness.

Pick your poison … you may not die from it but it is surely painful now and will remain painful.

Here is where they earn their business management F — any quasi-competent public relations person will say “stop ignoring this and kill it now … or it is going to dog you for the next foreseeable 100 day increments.” As long as this issue stays alive you may as well place another 25 pounds of rocks in the backpack you are already carrying <with rocks already in it>.

The plan: vision, roadmap, tactics & strategies

We are watching 100 day business malpractice on this item on the report card.

There is no plan.

We have heard no vision.

We haven’t really been offered a tactical plan of action <and how the tactics would be implemented>.

And I certainly haven’t heard any strategies to meet any articulated objective.

Sure.

Some of the things he does certainly sends an “American First” message … but they are verbally driven tactics <not tangible doing stuff>. As for the long game … well … there is no long game. It smells of a short term amateur leader saying to his people at the table “I need to do something, anything, tell me what my options are because I am going to do something.”

So far the only roadmap I have seen is “they have no coherent strategy and will act impulsively” combined with “a leader anxious to use his military to make a point.”

This is malpractice.

And I say that and I am not even a big “plan” guy.

But every 100 day scenario I have ever been part of has created a road map to get shit done and what objectives we were aiming for and an overall vision so that the people on the ground never lost the North Star. Everyone finds that the roadmap has changed a bit at the 100 day mark, and that some things are done and others are not … but … at day 101 everyone is still going north and all the troops know what battle they are preparing for and you gather up the wins as wins and the losses are usually simply shit you just couldn’t get to.

Ok.

This is not malpractice … this is criminal.

This is the kind of shit every business leader can do in their sleep <not always well but can do>.

This is the kind of criminal activity that pisses other, more competent, business people off … because it is basic foundational “how to run a business” stuff.

I wouldn’t give an F … I would expel them from school — fire them.

Image

I tossed this one in here because by America being a global leader, at the end of a 100 days, it’s nice to assess the world’s view of the country image. In addition … I know image is important to Donald J Trump <oh, I mean mostly his own image is important>.

There are two parts to this one – domestic image & global image.

Domestic image

I will give him credit.

He is doing everything in his power to make himself look great <again and again>. He signs more pieces of paper under the spotlight than anyone has ever done before <bigly> as well as bolts on hyperbole to everything he says and about what he does do <biggest, greatest, only, no one else/before, etc> . Let me address the ‘doing’ image part first.

Here is the truth behind all those paper signing events:

Like most of Trump’s regulatory executive orders, Friday’s presidential actions will have little effect by themselves. Instead, Trump will instruct regulators to reexamine existing rules with an eye to rescinding them. But that process of deregulation can be as complicated as the original regulations, requiring the Treasury Department to ask for public comment and conduct a legal analysis.

And Mnuchin said the orders don’t give him any authority he doesn’t already have. “The purpose of the orders is to make clear what the administration’s and the president’s priorities are, and signal the importance of these issues to the American people,” he said.

The actions to be signed Friday include one executive order and two similar directives called presidential memoranda. In his first 92 days, Trump has now signed 25 executive orders and 15 presidential memoranda.

He is a paper signer and really not a doer. He is a transactional president seeking desperately for a transaction to own.

Dropping bombs? Transaction.

Travel ban? Attempted transaction.

Sending armada to intimidate? Faux transaction.

His domestic image is teetering on his hollow entertainment spotlight experiences. He teeters on the line of “wow, I am doing a lot of shit and meeting promises” and “incompetent bumbling.”

When others see his approval ratings they see good approval among minority & disapproval among majority. I do not. I see a population sitting on the sidelines watching the game with skepticism.

If you look behind the surface numbers you will see everyone expresses deep doubts & concerns <overall> but jump on semi-competent Trump behavior to express positive reinforcement … in other words … many people are actively seeking to find something positive to say <that is viewing the research through a people behavioral lens>.

The way to wrap your head around the contradictory information is to simply say that while people have some serious doubts they have not given up on him & the administration yet<that is a hollow win for Trump which he can take advantage of or lose as time progresses>.

The Republicans remain hopefully skeptical and the Democrats are in skeptically in despair that he has shown no improvement <but desperately want some improvement>.

I could argue that the Trump domestic image is in a huge world of hurt … but just as easily I could argue the Donald J Trump administration domestic image is positioned for huge success.

What I do know is that the first 100 days have been wasted in not actually building a solid image and yet the administration has worked extensively to build the appearance of a solid image.

Every business person with half a brain knows that this is not sustainable. At some point the façade needs a house built behind it.

Skepticism is like a virus. Untreated it can kill you.

They deserve no grade on this because they are at home sick — let’s hope, for the country’s sake, they get well soon.

Global image

Trump has a big issue … it is a … well … all country-by-country global image issue. While he sees unpredictability as a positive the rest of the world simply sees “making it up as he goes” and “he doesn’t know what the hell he is doing.”

While Trump vocalizes positive thoughts about Marine Le Pen surveys continue to show the majority of France just think he is nuts.

While Trump talks about … well … everything … the Russian media swings back & forth on positive <anti typical American moralistic establishment> and negative <loose cannon who doesn’t have the consistent leadership skills of Putin>.

He has pissed off a number of countries either through ignorant talk <naivete> or less-than-diplomatic direct interactions. The rest of the world absolutely sees he loves playing with soldiers & gun & bombs but is less sure he loves knowing how the world actually works.

All I can say is that, after 100 days, television in the USA is constantly seeking to find the silver lining in every breath he takes … while global television simply laughs – at him and at the USA.

Every business person knows image isn’t everything … but it is part of the whole thing. Style AND substance matters. Right now I would grade the image as “incomplete.” It remains mostly hollow now but … given the right focus and effort … it can be filled in a way that builds a good solid image <but I am not holding my breath>.

Okay.

That is my main report card … not so good for Donald J Trump through a business guy’s lens.

Oh.

But I do have one more thing.

They will not judge themselves on this one but I sure as shit am.

Message to our young people

We have about 75 million young people under the age of 18. They watch, listen and discuss among themselves what is going on. They watch, listen and think as we adults discuss among ourselves what is being said and going on.

Because we have a combative, narcissistic, intellectual-curious-challenged president it seems like all communications are developed and communicated as if they are designed to one specific audience – it is almost like they think in a one-to-one communication tunnel <by the way … many politicians, in general, edge into this territory it is just the Trump administration has set up home in this territory>.

If it is supposed to be a message to democrats it is a “you suck & are a loser” message.

If it is supposed to be a message to the media it is a “you lie and are fake” message.

If it is supposed to be a message to the world it is “there is no we, only I matters.”

If it is supposed to be a message to Americans on why something was not done it is “someone else is to blame.”

<note: watch this last one arise to a crescendo this week … blaming democrats, establishment, unicorns, media, karma & any Republican he can point a finger at — but never himself>

Sigh.

It is so misguided with regard to how we want our youth to think it can make you sad if you think about it too much.

Now.

That said.

I was livid when scanning a moment in a press briefing the other day where Sean Spicer, obviously channeling Trump, aggressively stated “somehow the Democrats are trying to position the recent Georgia 6th district election as a win, it was a loss. They lost. There is no other way to look at it. They lost.”

<envision my head exploding here>

Okay.

Listen up you assholes … what this tells children is that if 25 kids are in a race 1 is a winner, the other 24 are losers. This suggests that even if you weren’t even supposed to finish the race of 25 … and you finished 10th you shouldn’t celebrate … because you lost … and you are a loser.

Sorry Sean <and your sorry administration> … fuck you.

I know you want to send a direct message to Democrats, which in your pea-like brain are the only people who exist in this country you plan on making great again, but there are 330 million people and , maybe more importantly, maybe 75 million young people watching, listening & discussing the shit <words> you say.

Where is respect for competition & your competitors?

Where is dignity in the win?

Where is how you play, and how you win, is maybe more important than winning?

Where is the fact that, in times of despair, moral victories are what people use to get up again the next morning, to pick up their weapon and walk into another battle, to tell their child that they shouldn’t quit because maybe that had got one step farther … while still ending one step behind?

Where is that … you shitheads?

You may think you are communicating your asshat thoughts directly to one audience and one audience alone … but everything you say is communicating with 330 million people. Ponder that you assholes.

On this judgement I will not give them a grade … I will just say they are losers.

And they lose every time they pull this shit.

Anyway.

Conclusion.

100 days performance.

Yeah.

Judging on 100 days is fair.

Judge the little shit if you want … how he is meeting “his promises” if you want <NPR did a nice job of listing all the promises out for you — see below>.

In my mind that is the wrong way to judge the 1st 100 days — although the politicians & pundits seem to be making it the way to develop the Trump report card. The promises, at best, are tactics. Mostly they were simply soundbites to energize listeners.

I could also argue that if a promise was stupid in the first place isn’t it just stupid to do it … let alone give someone credit for doing it?

Anyway.

If you judge Donald J Trump and his administration solely on promises made/promises, you simply join him skating on the incredibly thin ice of the slippery surface of irrelevance.

We should want to see the roadmap, the vision, the strategy, objectives and throw in some tactics if you want … and hire some frickin’ people to get it all done <not just some promises made & met>.

I want to see the organizational infrastructure necessary to lead, build & implement a plan <if a plan is ever developed>.

Overall they don’t deserve even an F.

It is a 100 days empty of what would make the following 100 day increments unfold effectively & efficiently. Strip away “promises met” and focus on the more important larger construct of “who” will make “what” happen and the Trump administration on day 101 looks an awful lot like what they did on day 1. This would suggest that not only should we expect the exact same

I want people to think about our politics here in America, because I’m telling you guys that I don’t know of a single nation in this history of the world that’s been able to solve its problems when half the people in the country absolutely hate the other half of the people in that country.

This is the most important country in the world, and people in this body cannot function if people are offending one another.

—

Marco Rubio

===================

Well.

Polarization can create some pretty foul conduct.

Polarization can bring out the worst in people.

Polarization can create stillness within turmoil when movement within teamwork is needed <and desired>.

And.

Polarization within leadership is a virus that infects everyone in the organization … not just in leadership.

Warren gained all the headlines where Rubio actually had the words we should have all been listening to. It is maybe 8 minutes long and worth every second.

Please note that I believe this message is more important than just one directed toward the Senate … it is a message which all Americans should take note of.

We are fortunate to have the privilege of freedom of speech & thought and we should embrace that freedom as one to permit healthy discussion, debate and disagreements … all of which should enable healthy, positive decisions.

Freedom is a tricky thing. In the United States of America we have the unique opportunity to “criticize a president without retribution.” <as past President Obama said to a group of military people at MacDill Air Force base>.

But our freedoms are being challenge by Trump and his attitudes & behaviors in ways we haven’t really seen in a very very long time.

The Trump Affect ripples way beyond simple executive orders and specific actions that will have an impact on the people of the country. The more dangerous ripple effect is one of attitudes & behaviors.

Within this dangerous Trump affect ripple, the freedom to freely criticize is a little less secure … and the way we criticize, debate & discuss in the Trump era appears to be one of not listening, not respecting and not believing that there could possibly be a way to do something differently than the way “I believe.”

Trump and his merry little band of morally corrupt liars suggest that there is no middle ground for “ladies & gentlemen to disagree with ladies & gentlemen”<note: this is a rip off of the Ritz Carlton motto>.

The Trump Affect has trickled down into his direct organization … the congress.

And within that ripple Republicans either embrace the bully opportunity or simply privately watch in horror as leadership decorum and leadership example <which, by the way, IS important as impressionable children and adult seeking cues on how to be leaders watch closely>.

And within that ripple Democrats screech & gnash their teeth in impotent frustration over not only having no power to shift the tides of change but also because, in their heart of hearts, they know this is not the way business should be conducted.

Balance has disappeared.

While people can bitch & moan that decorum, in the past, has only encouraged stagnancy & lack of action they should not confuse with what business is conducted and how business is conducted.

Just as I am more accepting of my high school football coach if we have a losing season but the players play with respect & dignity and go to class and show signs of growing up with a healthy personal responsibility … I am less accepting of the coach who permits poor behavior & lack of respectful competition even if they win more.

You can have all the good in this case. But balance has been lost.

In fact.

We should face the fact that balance deserted us the day Trump stepped onto his golden Trump Tower escalator last year to announce his candidacy.

And that is why Rubio’s speech is so important. Without actually saying it he suggests that we shouldn’t let Trump drag us down into some dysfunctional squabbling amorphous blob of indignant jerks.

=================

“Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do.

Both are nonsense.

You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate.”

———-

Rick Warren

==========

I like conflict and I think conflict is healthy.

It is a basic Life truth that conflict is the positive friction that often creates innovations and new thinking and new ideas.

But, as with most things in life, there are degrees of conflict.

The kind of conflict we need now, more than ever, is the productive type.

We need to better embrace the valuable contradictions in life.

Things like:

Smart and funny.

Silent but says a lot.

Liberal conservative.

Cynical optimist.

Oh.

And enlightened and conflict of course.

We need to better embrace the fact that contradictions are powerful.

They create a chemistry ending in positive friction <when done right> and the fire for innovative thinking and thoughts.

In general I believe contradiction not only make life & people interesting but they also forge the kind of decisions that become the iron construct for a solid culture, civilization and country.

We need to embrace that conflict is part of life and not treat it as only a negative thing.

Humans are neither passive nor stagnant. We move. We do. We think.

Combine that fact with individuals are unique <although they may group together> and inevitably there is some conflict. It can simply be healthy competition or it can be staggeringly evil intended activity <i.e. there will be conflict because your point of view and thoughts shouldn’t exist and I am going to extinguish them>.

We need to embrace the fact that conflict can be “managed”.

Maybe call it competitive camaraderie. I call it enlightened conflict. I believe if people know more about stuff <I don’t really believe it needs a technical term> then conflict will be conducted with knowledge.

I would suggest that ignorance, and being close minded, guides conflict toward evil interactions … while knowledge guides conflict to responsible interactions.

Lastly.

We need to embrace that enlightened conflict is really some version of pluralism.

A pluralism in that it encourages, and embraces, freedom to learn and freedom to think different thoughts.

In the end I imagine what I really care about are people’s actions. They can remain mute as far as I am concerned as long as their actions respect others opinions and others lives and meets global responsibilities.

Look.

It is silly to think that conflict doesn’t exist as part of our natural behavior <I apologize to all the “why can’t we all get along” groups>.

It is silly to think that friction between beliefs and causes is not the spark for something better.

It is silly to think conflict and friction is not good.

Good conflict leads to positive friction and ideation and evolution of ideas.

But it needs to be conducted with respect. Respectful disagreements & debate lead to two things:

Positive friction.

Enlightened conflict.

The first is based on curiosity plus friction equals better ideas and thinking.

The second is lack of ignorance plus conflict equals respectful competition.

We here in the United States have an incredible privilege … a freedom to say what we want and disagree and criticize whomever we want. We shouldn’t abuse that privilege by not understanding that it creates good conflict which enables ‘gooder’ ideas.

Marco Rubio did something in his speech which I endorse wholeheartedly … he tried to make an impact on his own little corner of the world … encouraging positive friction for enlightened conflict.

Marco Rubio had a stellar enlightened conflict moment … and more people should see it and listen.

=============

“Enlighten the people, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.”

Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer.

Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past. Let us accept our own responsibility for the future.

—-

John F. Kennedy

==========

Whew. Finally.

The last 2016 American election presidential debate. No more World Wrestling Foundation political events.

While I will say a couple things let me begin with the most important thing everyone should pay attention to with regard to the third debate — the close.

Anyone in business knows that how you close a big meeting is, well, YUGE <as Bernie Sanders would say>.

=========

Their closing statements summed it all up for me: Clinton’s was a message of hope and unification, Trump couldn’t help himself and ended on a pointless attack. Never has a candidate proven himself so utterly childlike – it’s entertaining but profoundly disturbing that he’s actually managed to make it this far.

Djozer

===============

Closing statements create the foundation for vision and attitude which ultimate blends into the behavior you should expect. Just as in what they decided to wear … I received optimism and togetherness from the lady in white and dark, despair and divide from the man in black.

I couldn’t think of better symbolism for the choice at hand.

As for the debate itself? While exhibiting moments of actual leadership lucidity, Trump continuously reverts back to some tween like persona given half a chance.

Alternative universe moments:

<1>:

“Look, she’s been proven to be a liar in so many ways,” Trump pouted.

“This is just another lie.”

<when, in fact, she spoke his own words back to him>

Parallel universe?

This after he had run thru a continuous string of lies <or ¼ truths> that fact checkers just gave up and suggested he could do nothing but lie.

<2>:

“Such a nasty woman.”

Parallel universe?

Uhm … hard to reconcile Trump’s remark with a claim he made earlier the night that “no one has more respect for women than I do.”

<3>:

“<insert anything he says here>”

Parallel universe?

Anything his surrogates say trying to explain what he said.

<note: if you are actually paying people to tell people what you really said and what you really meant you do not belong in that job>

Next.

To me the funniest moment was ‘You’re The Puppet!’ <a moment that had every small child gleefully clapping>

Background: Trump just lost his temper when Clinton suggested Russian president Vladimir Putin would like to see Trump in office “because he’d rather have a puppet as president.”

“No puppet, no puppet!” Trump interjected.

Clinton continued, “It’s pretty clear you won’t admit…”

“You’re the puppet!” Trump shouted.

“That the Russians have engaged in cyber attacks …”

“No, you’re the puppet!” Trump said again.

“Against the United States of America,” Clinton concluded.

You just cannot make this shit up. This is comedic genius <albeit part of a presidential debate>.

Next.

To me the most horrifying moment <of which there were several candidates for this slot> was the late term abortion discussion moment where Trump gave a horrifying description of ripping full-term babies from the womb <several times … it seemed like he liked saying it>.

Sigh.

I don’t care if you are pro-life or not … Trump’s foul and incorrect depiction of later term abortion was … well … horrifying.

Look.

Debates are debates and politics is messy. I don’t really care <assuming we actually get to hear the truth on occasion and ‘communication malpractice’ is kept to a minimum>. But words really do matter. Despite Trump’s seeming disdain for not only using adult words and acting like an adult when he speaks what he says is heard by millions and, whether they agree with him or not, those same millions at least ponder them as some semi credible thought <because, for god’s sake, he is the nominee of one of the 2 parties>.

We have heard him diminish people, groups of people and religions of people, we have heard him call Clinton much worse than a “nasty woman”, we have heard him espouse a creative array of conspiracy theories <presented as fact> and we have heard him offer a safe haven for the rage of anyone who believes America is not the America that they want.

I cannot envision how Trump can win. America just seems too good for him. But in his ignorant bull in a china shop leadership style he has inserted an insidious thread of “un-American thoughts” under the guise of “what makes America great” which actually threatens the foundation of the republic.

He is a false prophet to people who have real grievances.

It creates a challenge for the Clinton presidency. But a challenge worth taking on.

She will have to ignore Trump and listen to these people.

While I believe she will be a good president and will offer the country some good pragmatic actionable ideas I believe her presidency will ultimately be defined by how well she listens to what she referred to as “the deplorables” and invests in their lives enough so that they no longer act in deplorable ways. And, maybe mos importantly, she invests in words & thoughts to fill the spaces in people’s minds with good & ‘right’ thoughts.

Regardless.

Thank god the debates are over.

ADDENDUM:

Speaking of closings … last evening was a charity event in which both Trump & Clinton light hearted jabbed at themselves and each other. Some jabs were good and some feel flat.

I don’t care. It was a charity event.

However. Clinton chose to close her lighthearted comments by shifting into a more serious presidential-like message.

I will admit. Most times her speaking is too measured and too earnest for my tastes.

But. She has what I call “a presidential gear.” She shifts gears. She looks slightly more focused and her voice drops down and flattens her vowels and rounds out her consonants.

And when she does that and has the right words? Yowza. And she chose to do so at the close of this dinner and hit a frickin’ grand slam home run.

It was a fabulous message for a fabulous country working through a fabulously difficult time. I cannot find all the words online but she reminded the audience that the namesake of the dinner, Al Smith, faced prejudice for being Catholic and that many of the dinner’s attendees were immigrants or children of immigrants and said:

“There is nothing funny about the stakes in this election. In the end, what makes this dinner important are not the jokes we tell, but the legacy we carry forward. It is often easy to forget how far this country has come, and there are a lot of people in this room tonight who themselves, or their parents or grandparents, came here as immigrants, made a life for yourselves, took advantage of the American dream and the greatest system that has ever been created in the history of world.

Divisive rhetoric makes it harder for us to see each other and listen to each other, and certainly a lot harder to love our neighbor as ourselves.”

“We don’t own nothin’, we just borrow it. When you die, another man moves in and your daughter calls him daddy. Death is the tax a soul has to pay to have a name and a form.“

———-

Muhammed Ali

========================

Muhammed Ali has died … and I feel like a little oxygen has been sucked out of the atmosphere.

We don’t own nothin’.

That is a Life attitude that could drive a person to greatness. An attitude that says today is temporary and tomorrow I gotta get up and start all over and prove myself one more time.

To me … that summarizes Muhammed Ali.

He was a complicated puzzle to me.

Why?

He wasn’t satisfied to be just a boxer.

He offered none of the humility most of us expect of athletes.

He wasn’t just a great athlete … he was casual competing in his greatness.

And above it all there were personal things bigger than what happened in the ring.

The Ali look.

The Ali rules of life. <As Cassius Clay said “I don’t have to be what you want me to be. I’m free to be who I want.”>

The Ali words and wordsmithing.

The Ali brashness.

The Ali aura.

He never relinquished his right to living life his way.

Did I like it all the time?

Nope.

I disliked the brashness.

But I loved the casual athletic greatness.

And I admired the sense of self … and his stubbornness with regard to maintaining his ‘self’ as society did its best to squeeze it into on existence and be reshaped into what everyone expected greatness to be.

He refused to be defined as it was defined and steadfastly suggested … no … demanded … that he be judged on his own terms.

Was it easy? Nope.

Not on him.

And not on us.

Many of us … me included … balked.

But you know what? In the end he taught me to view greatness differently … and for that I owe him a debt. I owe anyone who can make me see something differently … especially something like ‘greatness.’

That said.

When people say he was the greatest … I don’t agree.

I believe he redefined greatness.

I believe he redefined how generations would view greatness for … well … generations to come.

In fact.

Rethinking what I just wrote … I believe he didn’t just redefine … he destroyed how greatness was defined and created it using himself as the image.

He didn’t own greatness … he defined it. And that said … he did it within his overall attitude … “we got nothin’.”

And, yet, when I saw he died … I felt like I had lost something.

A little oxygen got sucked out of Life.

Why do I say something like that?

I was fortunate enough to be sitting in a restaurant in Los Angeles in the 90’s when Muhammed Ali walked thru to a private room in the back of the restaurant.

Even though no one knew who or what was happening before he arrived … I vividly remember a slight buzz overcoming the main dining room minutes before he appeared.

I vividly remember him gliding thru the room in an impeccable suit surrounded by large men in impeccable suits … but mostly I remember how it felt.

It felt like his presence sucked a little oxygen out of the room. It’s like his presence demanded a little bit more than the rest of us.

“The combination of technology and capitalism has given us a world that really feels out of control.”

—

Jonathon Franzen

=====

“Communism forgets that life is individual. Capitalism forgets that life is social, and the Kingdom of Brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of Communism nor the antithesis of capitalism but in a higher synthesis.”

—–

Martin Luther King 1967

====

Why am I writing my umpteenth article on capitalism?

I saw a number from some USA research the other day that said something like 50% of people under the age of 30 do not believe in capitalism.

Ok.

Capitalism is good.

Capitalism is not bad.

Just wanted to get that out of the way.

But that does not mean there isn’t always a tension between good and bad in the soul of capitalism. It is an incredible wealth-creating & life bettering mechanism and, yet, left to its own devices can run off the tracks <morally and financially>. Capitalism needs guard rails or, as some smart guy called it, “embedded countervailing power.” It needs guard rails because humans will be humans.

When business is good, human beings become greedy.

When business is bad, human beings become fearful.

And I would like to remind everyone that culture is created by, uhm, human beings. I say that not to be a smart ass but to suggest there is a real culture war in America, maybe the world, and it is occurring in the business world. I purposefully use ‘culture’ because it has to do with some ethics or moral fortitude, some personal responsibility and some pragmatic hope for the future. In fact, if we fix how capitalism works <systemic & infrastructure aspects>, the net result is addressing income inequality, wage stagnation and overall economic prosperity as well as some individual “self-stuff” <kind of all the big societal issues we tend to discuss>.

Anyway.

A moment on the role of government.

It is both a fallacy to believe Government is not the problem nor believe they are the solution. We have a mixed economy < I stole that term from Foreign Policy magazine>.

Capitalism is not supposed to be a system which is about maximizing corporate profit at the expense of the citizenry. Therefore, effective governance curbs greed objectives & regulates capitalism so that it does the good things it is supposed to do <innovate & bring prosperity to many> and it doesn’t do the bad things <be driven solely by greed>.

Let’s be clear.

America is not based on an unfettered capitalism nor has it ever been <nor was it ever meant to be by the founding fathers>. It is a managed capitalism system <always has been — I say that to head off any of the ‘government is too involved’ today talking heads>.

Government attempts, sometimes better than other times, to put reins on humans within a capitalistic society. Let’s say it’s something like giving enough range for wild horses to run free, but not to trample the gardens and lawns of the surrounding areas. This ‘fettered’ managed capitalism idea is not perfect. It ebbs and flows and morphs into different shapes as time passes. But it IS an effective economic and political system.

I would suggest that, while polarizing, capitalism is balanced … when balanced.

That said. A better version of capitalism really is not dependent upon governance and laws <and putting banks out of business>, but rather personal decisions, choices & responsibility. Yes. I just suggested <again> that people, not the system, will define the better version of capitalism. Adam Smith suggested the three pillars of a society are: prudence, looking after oneself as best as one is able; justice, keeping the law of the land; and beneficence, caring for others and society where there is need.

Clearly our main issue is not how to survive on true scarcity <that is not a perceived scarcity or a “less than” scarcity> but rather how to live well with plenty.

To date we have chased double digit growth and higher GDP all the while seeking higher material happiness <sometimes confused with higher standard of living>.

We have become societally insatiable. In other words … we cannot have enough.

This funny Maslow chart reflects that as additional personal needs are fulfilled it induces new needs <which we, as humans, constantly improve ourselves in order to further attain these ‘self actualization’ activities>. Think about this from a non-funny sustenance perspective in growing from poverty to non poverty <but the dimension perspective will always reside in the human mind>.

Yes. Capitalism has certainly vastly improved our lives and our means to live. But it has also fed this insatiability.

Some guy named Sandel wrote in “what money can’t buy … the moral limits of markets:”

the more things money can buy the more the lack of it hurts.

buying and selling can change the way a good is perceived (he used “giving children money as incentive to read a book may make reading a chore rather than a simple pleasure”).

This all leads to an overall attitude that endless <and double digit> growth is essential to maintain and improve our quality of life. While I will not go into the detailed debate … that is simply not true <this is he typical efficiency versus effectiveness argument>.

Now. All that said. The issue is really about the attitudes & attributes we are attaching to capitalism.

As I share some thoughts to try and address the young’s lack of belief in capitalism I will lead with two things:

Youth thinks it invents the world. Maturity respects the world it finds.

Suffice it to say that Capitalism is becoming some evil entity in the minds of many young people. In addition, aspects of other ideologies <communism being one> are being used relatively flippantly as ‘better than’ what is occurring within capitalism. I actually believe it is a lack of understanding, but it is also quite possible there is a deeper lack of faith with capitalism.

If you step back you can see why the young <and the shallow thinkers> feel this way:

Real unemployment is nearly in double digits. Most Americans think the economy will recover next year, but only 2% think it will make a complete recovery.

On average, according to Gallup, Americans believe that 50 cents of every dollar the federal government spends is wasted. Democrats, who are supposed to believe in big government, guess that 41 cents of every federal dollar is wasted. Republicans think it is 54 cents, and independents put the number at 55 cents in the dollar.

A poll found that most Americans would rather their government did less. Some 57% said it was doing too many things that were better left to individuals and businesses. Only 38% thought it should do more.

And many people have genuine complaints. Many working-class men have lost their jobs. Those who are still employed have seen their wages stagnate/decrease. And overall they don’t trust government not to make it worse.

This is a sad state of affairs <for government who CAN make shit happen> because regulations can positively address stagnation & inequality without intervening in entrepreneurial decisions or in the price/profit mechanism. The harsh black & white truth no one wants to say is that regulation is what makes free markets, well, free <free markets cannot sustain themselves>.

Anyway.

I have been thinking about capitalism for a while nudging my mind toward discussing morals and character <society & culture>. In doing so I found it interesting to think about Schumpeter when addressing the youth capitalism challenge.

what Joseph Schumpeter called ‘the cultural contradictions’ of Capitalism

One of the cultural contradictions <I believe he outlined 5> was … Rationality. In that Capitalism encourages rationality in behavior. And that culture creates, and demands, a natural conflict by insisting on some ‘irrational’ behavior. Rationality comes to life as the “maximization” of particular interests of individuals and groups.

This same rationalization then bleeds into both personal lives <family & home> and ultimately becomes embodied in some form or fashion into cultural forms. Children become quasi economic assets <or their rearing incorporates rational ‘maximization’ theory embedded in capitalism>. At its extreme, maximization bleeds into soulless wealth and extreme consumption thereby substituting saving and societal salvation. Oddly, but fairly, he suggests consumption wins against accumulation. This leads to a certain diminishing of the desirability of incomes above a certain level. At the same time, however, when the breaks of certain values associated with ethical or religious tradition fail <called the sophrosyne: Greek philosophical term meaning healthy-mindedness and from there self-control or moderation guided by knowledge and balance. Roman poet Juvenal later interpreted sophrosyne as “mens sana in corpore sano” – “a healthy mind in a healthy body”> individuals and groups come into natural conflict with capitalism. The basic human instinct is one of core values <in some degree within everyone> and therefore the natural contradiction forces some balance within capitalism.

This means that the irrational components of behavior are critical for capitalism to emerge and withstand rational arguments … especially when based on long term considerations.

But. That said.

===

“This is the genius and the Achilles’ heel of American culture. We … have a strong belief in self-determination and agency, even when our expectations fly in the face of reality,”

Katherine Newman, who studies social mobility

====

Capitalism in America is not functioning efficiently for a variety of reasons, but that doesn’t make it bad.

Which leads me to the issue of Confused capitalism … or being confused by capitalism.

No matter how altruistic and non-materialistic you may be … the issue is simple … as we sit perched on a stool at the bar of society where we can scan the room and see the danger of those who have nothing or little … as well as those who have the most <and lots of most>.

If the majority of us begin to look like we are either nearing the dangerously ‘nothing people’ or, contrarily, appear to be too distant from those who ‘have the most’ <no matter what your exact status is> we get nervous if not angry. Materialism, culturally, is therefore naturally cyclical in that it will always seek to balance itself. For we always ‘want’, but most of us want it to be within the realm of ‘hopeful that we can get more’ … without appearing too greedy. Hence that is fairness.

Give me a chance for something more than I have and give me more and I won’t be too greedy.

While everyone can debate the role of money with regard to people’s happiness it is true that economic health does make people happier <more secure, more comfortable, more sustenance>.

This actually means that free-market capitalism is not devoted to integrity and a reliance on trust but rather economic growth. And this suggests the people need to be regulated.

Why do we balk at regulation?

The US has always been a wide-open, free-wheeling country, with a high tolerance for big winners and big losers as the price of equal opportunity in a dynamic society. Even though the US brand of capitalism has rougher edges than other democracies, most citizens inherently believe it is worth the trade-off for growth and mobility. Yet, at the same time, while we like the free wheeling we also recognize that we are going through some type of crisis. It just becomes a discussion on what type of crisis.

Some think it is a crisis of capitalism. <I don’t>

Others think the crisis is moral. <I do>

====

“Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim: The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.”

Bertrand Russell

====

First there is attitude. What is maybe a disregard for societal fairness versus what could be construed as individual ‘winning’ or ‘what I deserve.’ A lot has been written about the effects of globalization during the past generation. Much less has been said about the change in social norms that globalization enabled. Many people, particularly people in power positions, took the vast transformation of the economy as an excuse to rewrite the rules that used to govern their behavior. I say that because while there will always be isolated small groups of lawbreakers in high places what truly destroys morale is a systemic corner-cutting, rule-bending, self interest behavior type of construct.

I have thought about how and why this happens.

It starts early.

As young children we start off with a healthy core of greatness, but before long it gets covered in layers of doubt, fear and guilt. Often this is caused by people we trust most like parents, teachers and managers who put us down in subtle and less subtle ways. It’s as though people were flicking bits of mud at us until our core of greatness is totally covered. Even worse, we flick mud at ourselves by accepting smaller versions of ourselves through negative self-talk and poor thinking; and we become a tiny fraction of the potential that once existed.

Once potential is curbed we seek to find success in other ways sometimes circumventing “what is right” to make small excusable steps in our behavior to attain ‘small personal successes.”

Second is our propensity to consume <and its self perpetuation>.

Our propensity to consume without thought for the planet, the poor or even the person next door is a sign that greed and fear are the motives of the moment. Freedom certainly creates problems (inequalities most notably), but it also solves them.

But the central aspect of freedom advanced by these thinkers was the market, or what Adam Smith had described as the propensity to truck, barter and exchange. In this area, freedom allowed dispersed individuals—disposing of their own resources and choosing for themselves what they want to buy—to generate a level of prosperity that has had no precedent in human history. And the pricing system that emerges from the market—that is, from the push and pull of supply and demand—provides the indispensable knowledge needed to guide the economy.

So. All that said.

I would tell young people that Capitalism is not the issue.

It is the people within the system <and young people can fix that by entering the system>. The system can work just fine … it is simply being abused at the moment. Capitalism needs to be managed to be more oriented to the long term and socially more responsible.

Interestingly, Richard Branson has formed an initiative to do just this. I found it amusing that initially he sought to have a board of Business Elders — but there were too few candidates from the business world of sufficiently unimpeachable character to staff it <insert ‘oh my’ here>.

Anyway <to conclude part 1>.

Since World War II in particular, America has been on a consumption surge/binge. While wages have certainly stagnated family disposable income has grown, life standards have improved, health has improved and overall quality of life has improved <and showed a continuous growth>. Unfortunately, at the same time, while families busily lived their lives they also had access to the finest inventory of toys capitalism could provide. Each generation was doing better than the one before, life was good and standard of living acquired a layer of ‘non essentials’ as part of how the people lived a successful & happy life.

At the same time. Televisions starting bringing news, influential people talking and capitalism toys into the family living room. Television allowed busy families the opportunity to be exposed to complex issues through professionally crafted sound bites and talking points. People were now becoming more informed from a larger perspective, not just local perspective, and we ushered in the inevitable “keeping up with the Joneses” aspect.

What we face is the natural rising tide of ‘better than before’ facing the ebb and flow of time. The ebbing waters are not appreciated by those who drink from the current place. Is it greed for most people? No. It is simply a desire for the status quo – “better is a right not a privilege.” Therein lies the social & cultural task at hand.

Anyway <to conclude part 2>.

Doing something.

Me? I write and post on my blog. And speak about it wherever and whenever I can <especially to young people>.

It is easy to talk about it because it seems like if we take a moment and reflect on the problems in the world today we might easily come to the conclusion that it is mainly due to deterioration of our morality compass.

It seems like everywhere we see people filled with greed and intent on self-gratification. It seems like people are always willing to compromise on values/morality to make personal gains. That means we need to start talking about values and create some sort of awakening in the minds of people.

Will everyone do it? of course not. But someone has to go first. Someone has to become the catalyst for change.

Why not the youth? We should encourage them to enter the system and build what they desire from the inside out rather than simply breaking the system as unfixable.